Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Chapter 3
Impact Assessment Methodology
Table of Contents
3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 3-2
3.2 ESIA Process ............................................................................................................................. 3-2
3.2.1 Screening and Scoping ........................................................................................................ 3-3
3.2.2 Impact Significance Assessment ......................................................................................... 3-3
3.2.3 Environmental Impacts ......................................................................................................... 3-4
3.2.4 Socio- Economic Impacts..................................................................................................... 3-7
3.2.5 Environmental and Socio-Economic Impact Significance .................................................... 3-8
3.3 Accidental, Transboundary and Cumulative Impacts ................................................................. 3-9
3.4 Mitigation and Monitoring ........................................................................................................... 3-9
Table of Figures
Figure 3.1:
Table of Tables
Table 3.1:
Table 3.2:
Table 3.3:
Table 3.4:
Table 3.5:
December 2015
Draft
3.1
Chapter 3
Impact Assessment Methodology
Introduction
This Chapter of the Environmental and Socio-Economic Impact Assessment (ESIA) sets out the ESIA
process adopted for the Shallow Water Absheron Peninsula (SWAP) 3D Seismic Survey and the
methodology used to assess impact significance.
3.2
ESIA Process
The ESIA process constitutes a systematic approach to the evaluation of a project and its associated
activities throughout the project lifecycle. The process (refer to Figure 3.1) includes:
Figure 3.1:
Project Alternatives
Analysis of viable
alternatives to base
case design
Existing Conditions
Baseline environmental
and socio-economic
conditions
Impact Assessment
Determine activity event
magnitudes
Determine receptor sensitivities
Identify existing controls and base
case mitigation
Determine impact significance
Residual Impacts
Undertake residual impact assessment and determine any additional mitigation
measures required
December 2015
Draft
3-2
3.2.1
Chapter 3
Impact Assessment Methodology
Screening is the first step in the assessment process. It confirms the need (or otherwise) for an ESIA
by appraising the type of project and its associated activities throughout the project lifecycle in the
context of its biophysical, socio-economic, policy and regulatory environments.
Given the location, scale and planned activities associated with the SWAP 3D Seismic Survey, and in
line with the SWAP PSA and national legislation the requirement to complete an ESIA for the SWAP
3D Seismic Survey was identified. This is consistent with the approach taken for similar seismic
surveys completed in the Azeri Chirag Gunashli (ACG), Shah Deniz (SD) and Shafag-Asiman
Contract Areas, which are all operated by BP and located in the Azerbaijani sector of the Caspian
Sea. The scope of the ESIA was agreed with the Ministry of Ecology and Natural Resources (MENR)
at a scoping meeting held in August 2015 (refer to Chapter 7 for further details).
Scoping is a high level assessment of anticipated interactions between project activities and
1
environmental and socio-economic receptors . Its purpose is to focus the assessment on key
issues and eliminate certain activities from the full impact assessment process based on their limited
potential to result in discernible impacts. To arrive at a conclusion to scope out an activity/event, a
mixture of expert scientific judgement based on prior experience of similar activities and events and,
in some instances, scoping level quantification/numerical analysis (e.g. emission and discharge
modelling) is used.
The SWAP 3D Seismic Survey Scoping process has included:
Review of available environmental and socio-economic data and reports relevant to the area
potentially affected by the SWAP 3D Seismic Survey activities;
Primary and secondary environmental and social baseline data collected during the SWAP
3D Seismic Survey Project ESIA process; and
Liaison with the SWAP 3D Seismic Survey Project Team to gather data and to formulate an
understanding of project activities.
Based on the findings of the review and data gathering, the SWAP 3D Seismic Survey ESIA Team
identified potential project related environmental and socio-economic impacts based on likely
interactions between seismic survey activities and environmental/socio-economic receptors. In
addition the Team identified gaps where the extent, depth and/or quality of available environmental,
socio-economic and/or technical data at the scoping stage was insufficient for the SWAP 3D Seismic
Survey Project ESIA process. This allowed the scope of the work required to complete the ESIA to be
confirmed. Further information on data collection and consultation undertaken during the ESIA
preparation is provided within Chapter 7 of this ESIA.
3.2.2
For the purpose of this assessment, a receptor is considered an aspect of the existing biophysical and social environment
(i.e. air, water, land, sediments, habitats, communities, etc.) that is affected by or interacts with the project activities.
December 2015
Draft
3-3
Chapter 3
Impact Assessment Methodology
The approach to evaluating the significance of potential environmental and socio-economic impacts is
set out in the sections below. It should be noted that impact significance is assessed taking into
account existing control measures that are incorporated into the project design.
Impacts can be positive or negative depending on whether they result in a beneficial or adverse
change when compared to baseline conditions.
3.2.3
Environmental Impacts
3.2.3.1
Event magnitude is determined based on the following parameters, which are equally weighted and
are each assigned a rating of 1, 2, or 3:
Extent / Scale: Events range from those where the effect extends across an area:
2
For the purpose of this assessment, it is understood as source the origin place for operational emissions and discharges,
including underwater sound (seismic array), vibrations (seismic source), atmospheric emissions and light emissions (vehicles
and vessels) and marine discharges (vessels).
3
In the case of underwater sound this parameter relates to peak sound pressure level or sound energy level depending on the
criteria selected
December 2015
Draft
3-4
Chapter 3
Impact Assessment Methodology
Overall, event magnitude is scored from low (1) to high (12) by adding the individual parameter
scores:
Resulting individual ratings are summed to give the overall event magnitude ranking. Table 3.1
presents the score ranges for magnitude rankings of Low, Medium and High.
Table 3.1:
3.2.3.2
Low
Medium
5-8
High
9-12
Receptor sensitivity considers the type of receptor (namely, biological/ecological, human and physical
receptor/feature); and is determined based on the following parameters, which are equally weighted
and are each assigned a rating of 1, 2, or 3:
Biological/Ecological Receptors:
Presence ranges from:
4
3 Internationally threatened species /protected area within the area impacted by the
project activities during period of high sensitivity (e.g. during breeding, spawning or
nesting) and during routine or reliably predictable peak presence; to
4
2 - Internationally threatened species /protected area within the area impacted by the
project activities outside of period of high sensitivity or during routine or reliably
predictable peak presence.
5
Internationally near threatened species within the area impacted by the project activities
during period of high sensitivity (e.g. during breeding, spawning or nesting) and/or during
routine or reliably predictable peak presence.
Nationally protected species and/or species which are of importance to the local and
regional ecosystem within the area impacted by the project activities.
1 - Presence of species which is none of the above.
Resilience (to the identified stressor) ranges from:
3 - Species and/or population which has little or no capacity to absorb or adapt to change
(i.e. little or no capacity to move away from or adapt to the project impact), leading to
potential for substantial change of character and/or loss of ecological functionality.
4
5
December 2015
Draft
3-5
Chapter 3
Impact Assessment Methodology
2 - Species and/or population which has moderate capacity to absorb or adapt to change
(i.e. has capacity to move away from or adapt to the project impact), leading to potential
temporary but sustainable effect which does not substantially alter character or result in
significant loss of ecological functionality.
1 - Species and/or population has high capacity to absorb or adapt to change (i.e. has
capacity to move away from or adapt to the project impact), and is potentially unaffected
or marginally affected.
Human Receptors:
Presence ranges from:
3 - People being permanently present (e.g. residential property) in the geographical area
of anticipated impact; to
2 - People being present some of the time (e.g. commercial property); to
1 - People being uncommon in the geographical area of anticipated impact.
Resilience (to the identified stressor) ranges from:
3 - Most vulnerable groups (i.e. ambient conditions such as air quality are at or above
adopted standards); to
2 - People being vulnerable to change or disturbance (i.e. ambient conditions such as air
quality are below adopted standards); to
1 - People being least vulnerable to change or disturbance (i.e. ambient conditions such
as air quality are well below applicable legislation and international guidance).
Physical Receptors/Features:
Presence (to the identified stressor) ranges from:
3 - Presence of feature which has, in reverse order, national or international value (e.g.
state protected monument); to
2 Feature with local or regional value and is sensitive to disturbance; to
1 - Feature which is none of the above.
Resilience (to the identified stressor) ranges from:
3 Highly vulnerable (i.e. potential for substantial damage or loss of physical integrity);
2 Undergoes moderate but sustainable change which stabilises under constant
presence of impact source, with physical integrity maintained; and
1 Feature/receptor is unaffected or marginally affected (i.e. resilient to change);
Overall, receptor sensitivity is then scored on a scale from low (1) to high (6) by adding the individual
parameter scores:
December 2015
Draft
3-6
Chapter 3
Impact Assessment Methodology
Table 3.2 presents the score ranges for sensitivity rankings of Low, Medium and High.
Table 3.2:
3.2.4
Low
Medium
3-4
High
5-6
Medium
High
December 2015
Draft
3-7
Table 3.4:
Sensitivity
Low
Medium
Chapter 3
Impact Assessment Methodology
High
3.2.5
For both Environmental and Socio-Economic Impacts, impact significance, as a function of event
magnitude and receptor sensitivity, is ranked as Negligible, Minor, Moderate or Major as presented
in Table 3.5.
Table 3.5:
Impact Significance
Low
Medium
High
Low
Negligible
Minor
Moderate
Medium
Minor
Moderate
Major
High
Event Magnitude
Receptor Sensitivity
Moderate
Major
Major
Any impact classified as Major is considered to be significant and, where the impact is negative,
requires additional mitigation. Impacts of Negligible, Minor or Moderate significance are considered
as being mitigated as far as practicable and necessary, and therefore, do not require further
mitigation.
December 2015
Draft
3-8
3.3
Chapter 3
Impact Assessment Methodology
In addition to assessing impacts associated with the routine SWAP 3D Seismic Survey activities the
following will also be assessed:
Impacts from Accidental Events: Impacts that arise as a result of a technical failure, human
error or as a result of natural phenomena such as a seismic event.
Transboundary Impacts: Defined as impacts that occur outside the jurisdictional borders of
a projects host country.
Cumulative Impacts: While an impact may be relatively small when considering the project
or activity on its own, it may be magnified in combination with impacts from other projects and
activities; these combined effects are known as cumulative impacts.
2.
Interactions between separate project-related residual impacts this could include the
effect of multiple project environmental interactions (e.g. underwater sound, discharges,
physical disturbance from vessel movements) on a single receptor or habitat with the resultant
effect being greater than each individual impact in isolation; and
Interactions between project-related residual impacts in combination with impacts from
other projects and their associated activities within the same area of influence This
effect can occur as a result of the combined impacts of a number of projects, which
individually might not be significant, but when considered together could create a significant
cumulative effect on a single receptor or habitat.
The steps taken to undertake the cumulative impact assessment presented in Chapter 10 comprise
the following:
Identify other known projects and activities within the vicinity of the SWAP 3D Seismic Survey
where there is potential for cumulative impacts;
Define the spatial (i.e. impacts are so close in space that their effects overlap) and temporal
(i.e. impacts are so close in time that the effect of one is not dissipated before the next one
occurs) scope of the assessment;
Assess potential cumulative impacts to the environmental and socio-economic receptors
potentially affected by the SWAP 3D Seismic Survey and the cumulative projects identified;
and
Where required, define measures to avoid, reduce, or mitigate any potentially significant
cumulative impacts to the extent possible.
The significance of accidental, transboundary and cumulative impacts are assessed using a
qualitative analysis of impacts.
3.4
The iterative and integrated nature of the ESIA and project planning processes means that the
majority of proposed additional mitigation measures and strategies have been incorporated into the
project and integrated into the design of the 3D Seismic. These measures / strategies have included
mitigation measures and ongoing commitments as previously adopted by other projects (including
other seismic surveys) in the AGT Region.
The ESIA will be submitted for review and comment to the MENR who will have an opportunity to
make comments on the findings (refer to Chapter 7, Section 7.6), including suggestions for additional
mitigation measures to those already committed to in this ESIA associated with project activities. If
deemed appropriate, such mitigation measures will be added to the 3D Seismic Survey design and/or
management programme.
December 2015
Draft
3-9